Search

Latent Agents in Networks: Estimation and Targeting In "Latent Agents in Networks: Estimation and Targeting," Baris Ata, Alexandre Belloni, and Ozan Candogan address the problem of estimating network effects in a setting in which data only on a subset of agents is available. In this setting, the observable agents influence each other's outcomes both directly and indirectly through their influence on the latent agents. Even in sparse networks, the combination of direct and indirect network effects yields a nonsparse influence structure that makes estimation challenging. The authors overcome this challenge and provide an estimation algorithm that performs well in high-dimensional settings. They also establish convergence rates for their proposed estimator and show that their performance guarantees are valid for a large class of networks. Finally, the authors demonstrate the application of their algorithm to a targeted advertising problem, in which it can be used to obtain asymptotically optimal advertising decisions despite the presence of latent agents. We consider a platform that serves (observable) agents, who belong to a larger network that also includes additional agents who are not served by the platform. We refer to the latter group of agents as latent agents. Associated with each agent are the agent's covariate and outcome. The platform has access to past covariates and outcomes of the observable agents, but no data for the latent agents is available to the platform. Crucially, the agents influence each other's outcome through a certain influence structure. In particular, observable agents influence each other both directly and indirectly through the influence they exert on the latent agents. The platform doesn't know the inference structure of either the observable or the latent parts of the network. We investigate how the platform can estimate the dependence of the observable agents' outcomes on their covariates, taking the presence of the latent agents into account. First, we show that a certain matrix succinctly captures the relationship between the outcomes and the covariates. We provide an algorithm that estimates this matrix using historical data of covariates and outcomes for the observable agents under a suitable approximate sparsity condition. We also establish convergence rates for the proposed estimator despite the high dimensionality that allows more agents than observations. Second, we show that the approximate sparsity condition holds under the standard conditions used in the literature. Hence, our results apply to a large class of networks. Finally, we illustrate the applications to a targeted advertising problem. We show that, by using the available historical data with our estimator, it is possible to obtain asymptotically optimal advertising decisions despite the presence of latent agents. Funding: O. Candogan acknowledges NSF award 2216912 for "Institute for Data, Econometrics, Algorithms and Learning". Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2023.2485. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic had a huge impact on the access to and provision of ART treatments. Gradually, knowledge of the virus and its transmission has become available, allowing ART activities to resume. Still, questions on the impact of the virus on human gametes and fertility remain.Objective and Rationale: This article summarizes published data, aiming to clarify the impact of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 disease on human fertility and assisted reproduction, as well as the impact of vaccination, and from this, provide answers to questions that are relevant for people contemplating pregnancy and for health care professionals.Search Methods: PUBMED/MEDLINE and the WHO COVID-19 database were searched from inception to 5 October 2022 with search terms focusing on 'SARS-CoV-2' and gametes, embryos, reproductive function, fertility and ART. Non-English studies and papers published prior to 2020 were excluded, as well as reviews and non-peer reviewed publications. Full papers were assessed for relevance and quality, where feasible.Outcomes: From the 148 papers included, the following observations were made. The SARS-CoV-2-binding proteins, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and type II transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS2), are expressed in the testis, but co-expression remains to be proven. There is some evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the ejaculate of COVID-19 patients with severe disease, but not in those with mild/moderate disease. SARS-CoV-2 infection can impair spermatogenesis, but this seems to resolve after one spermatogenic cycle. Testosterone levels seem to be lower during and after COVID-19, but long-term data are lacking; disease severity may be associated with testosterone levels. COVID-19 cannot be considered a sexually transmitted disease. There is no co-expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the myometrium, uterus, ovaries or fallopian tubes. Oocytes seem to have the receptors and protease machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, viral RNA in oocytes has not been detected so far. Women contemplating pregnancy following COVID-19 may benefit from screening for thyroid dysfunction. There is a possible (transient) impact of COVID-19 on menstrual patterns. Embryos, and particularly late blastocysts, seem to have the machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most studies have not reported a significant impact of COVID-19 on ovarian reserve, ovarian function or follicular fluid parameters. Previous asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in females does not seem to negatively affect laboratory and clinical outcomes of ART. There are no data on the minimum required interval, if any, between COVID-19 recovery and ART. There is no evidence of a negative effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on semen parameters or spermatogenesis, ovarian function, ovarian reserve or folliculogenesis. A transient effect on the menstrual cycle has been documented. Despite concerns, cross reactivity between anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies and Syncytin-1, an essential protein in human implantation, is absent. There is no influence of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on patients' performance during their immediate subsequent ART cycle. Pregnancy rates post-vaccination are similar to those in unvaccinated patients.Wider Implications: This review highlights existing knowledge on the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 on fertility and assisted reproduction, but also identifies gaps and offers suggestions for future research. The knowledge presented should help to provide evidence-based advice for practitioners and couples contemplating pregnancy alike, facilitating informed decision-making in an environment of significant emotional turmoil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A suggested explanation for the pituitary-suppressive effects of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation cycles (PPOS) is pituitary luteinizing hormone (LH) depletion with progestin exposure during the follicular phase. The GnRH agonist (GnRHa) trigger releases endogenous LH from the pituitary, and if the LH depletion theory is correct, the response to the agonist trigger would be dampened in PPOS cycles. In this study, we compared the performance of the GnRHa trigger after PPOS and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation cycles. All women who underwent ovarian stimulation with the GnRH antagonist or flexible PPOS (fPPOS) and received a GnRH agonist trigger were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes included number of metaphase-II (MII) oocytes retrieved per cycle, rates of empty follicle syndrome, maturation, fertilization, blastulation, and cumulative clinical pregnancy per stimulation cycle. During the screening period, there were 166 antagonists and 58 fPPOS cycles triggered with a GnRH agonist. Groups were matched for potential confounders using propensity score matching. Progestin-downregulated cycles had 19% high mature oocyte yield (median: 14 vs. 19 MII oocytes, P = 0.03). Cumulative ongoing pregnancy or live birth rates were estimated after matching for transferred embryo count, and rates were similar between GnRH antagonist and fPPOS group (57.0% vs. 62.1%, P = 0.68). However, the number of remaining blastocysts was higher in the fPPOS group (median: 5.0 vs. 6.0, P < 0.001). LH levels were higher in fPPOS cycles compared to GnRH antagonist cycles up to the trigger day (P < 0.001). After the GnRHa trigger, fPPOS cycles were associated with a steeper LH surge compared with antagonist cycles (P = 0.02). Higher endogenous gonadotropin levels through the stimulation period and an LH surge of higher magnitude following a GnRHa trigger suggest a milder pituitary suppression by fPPOS, which needs to be confirmed in larger samples. It appears that progestins do not deplete pituitary LH reserves and a GnRHa trigger is usable after PPOS in women with high ovarian reserve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: It is thought that there is not enough data about the frequency of acceptance of oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in Turkish pregnant women. The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency of acceptance of OGTT among participants in our single tertiary center. METHODS: The data of non-diabetic 344 pregnant women seen at the Obstetrics Clinic of our hospital between September 2016 and September 2017 were obtained from the hospital records. Women who did not have regular follow-up during pregnancy were excluded. One of the two or one-step approaches was used in the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) depending on the choice of the physician following the patient. RESULTS: There were 223 subjects eligible for the study. One hundred seventy-seven pregnant women (79.4%) accepted to do OGTT. We determined that 46 women (20.6%) did not complete at least one OGTT, of whom 74% (n=34) never completed the recommended screening test in this cohort. The overall frequency of GDM was approximately 15.2% (n=34). OGTT acceptability was higher among pregnant women with university graduates (p=0.02). Adverse pregnancy outcomes were similar between the accepted and rejected groups. Among the reasons for OGTT rejection, the media had a significant influence (n=35). CONCLUSION: Our results show that a significant percentage of patients refused to do OGTT. Therefore the actual frequency of pregnant women with GDM could not be determined. One way to increase compliance may be recommending only the one-step test for pregnant women in countries with a high rejection rate of OGTT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists have been the standard of pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for ART, progestin primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has emerged as an alternative. Progestins can be started simultaneously with gonadotrophins (fixed PPOS) or later in the cycle depending on follicle growth (flexible PPOS). However, the flexible and fixed PPOS regimens have not been directly compared as of yet. This was a retrospective cohort study including women with diminished ovarian reserve who underwent oocyte cryopreservation. All women underwent ovarian stimulation with a fixed 300 IU daily dose of FSH. The primary outcome was the number of MII oocyte retrieved per cycle. Secondary outcome measures included the incidence of premature LH surge (>10ng/mL) and number of follicles larger than 14mm on the day of maturation trigger. During the screening period 2 out of 97 cycles were cancelled before oocyte retrieval, one in each group yielding an overall cancelation rate of 2%. Among women who had oocyte retrieval, 65 underwent flexible and 30 fixed PPOS. At baseline women on fixed and flexible PPOS had similar age (mean difference: -2.17 years, 95 % CI: -4.46 to 0.11) and serum AMH levels (mean difference: 0.10 ng/mL, 95% CI: -0.24 to 0.47). Slight imbalances between the groups were rectified with propensity score matching using age and AMH levels. The incidence of premature LH surge (RR: 1.47, 95% CI: 0.51 – 5.27, p = 0.50), follicle count larger than 14mm on hCG day (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.93 – 1.42, p = 0.22), number of MII oocytes retrieved (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.79 – 1.15, p = 0.61) were similar between flexible and fixed PPOS. The rate of no oocyte retrieval was same between the groups (0.0% both) but no formal estimation was possible. Flexible and fixed PPOS regimens had no appreciable differences regarding MII oocyte yield and the incidence of premature LH surges. Cycles without oocyte retrieval were rare in both groups and ultrasonographic parameters of gonadotropin response were similar. Our study suggests the performances of either progestin regimen are comparable in this group of women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the prognostic factors for intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle cancellation in patients with endometriosis-related infertility. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study and conducted at the Assisted Reproductive Technology center of Uludag University School of Medicine, between the years 2011-2017. The electronic database was screened and infertile patients with endometriosis, without male factor infertility, systemic disease, or undefined adnexal mass, and aged <40 were selected. The endometriosis phenotype of all cycles was classified into three subgroups: superficial endometriosis, ovarian endometrioma and deep infiltrating endometriosis. Cycles were divided into two groups: Group I (Cycle Cancellation) vs. Group II (Embryo transferred). RESULTS: Forty-four cycles were canceled and in 178 cycles, the embryo was able to be transferred. When the groups were compared age and day 3 FSH levels were statistically higher, and anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count were statistically lower in Group I. The presence of adenomyosis was higher in Group I (64% vs. 40% p<0.01). The surgery rate with laparotomy was higher in Group I (54.5% vs. 13.5% p<0.01). Antral follicle count remained as the only independent factor associated with prognoses of the IVF cycle with binary logistic regression analysis. Cancellation rates were similar between the phenotypes of endometriosis. CONCLUSIONS: Poor ovarian reserve, advanced age, presence of adenomyosis, and history of laparotomy are negative prognostic factors associated with intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle cancellation in endometriosis-related infertility. Antral follicle count is the only independent factor in predicting cycle cancellation. The phenotype of endometriosis does not affect the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: What is the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on the outcome of a pregnancy after medically assisted reproduction (MAR)?Summary Answer: Our results suggest that MAR pregnancies are not differentially affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to spontaneous pregnancies.What Is Known Already: Information on the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on pregnancy after MAR is scarce when women get infected during MAR or early pregnancy, even though such information is vital for informing women seeking pregnancy.Study Design, Size, Duration: Data from SARS-CoV-2 affected MAR pregnancies were collected between May 2020 and June 2021 through a voluntary data collection, organised by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE).Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: All ESHRE members were invited to participate to an online data collection for SARS-CoV-2-infected MAR pregnancies.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: The dataset includes 80 cases from 32 countries, including 67 live births, 10 miscarriages, 2 stillbirths and 1 maternal death. An additional 25pregnancies were ongoing at the time of writing.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: An international data registry based on voluntary contribution can be subject to selective reporting with possible risks of over- or under-estimation.Wider Implications Of the Findings: The current data can be used to guide clinical decisions in the care of women pregnant after MAR, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The authors acknowledge the support of ESHRE for the data registry and meetings. J.S.T. reports grants or contracts from Sigrid Juselius Foundation, EU and Helsinki University Hospital Funds, outside the scope of the current work. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.Trial Registration Number: N/A. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PGDIS Position statement on chromosome mosaicism and preimplantation aneuploidy testing at the blastocyst statement. Sir, [2] report live births from blastocysts with "abnormal" results, which were previously denied transfer. In the study by [2], after excluding results predicting "mosaicism" and "segmental aberrations", the transfer embryos with uniform whole chromosome aneuploidies, led to a clinical pregnancy loss rate of 100% (5/5 transfers with exclusively full chromosome aneuploid embryos). [Extracted from the article]

Background: This study compared outcomes of the standard 6000 IU human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger with a dual trigger comprised of 6000 IU hCG and 1 mg leuprolide acetate for final oocyte maturation in an intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycle. By convention, ICSI was performed in most cases at the clinic. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, a total of 50 women were included in each arm. Participants were matched for age, indication and number of prior assisted reproduction technology (ART) cycles. Women at risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) were excluded. A flexible gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol was used and final oocyte maturation was triggered when two leading follicles were >17 mm. Distribution of variables was evaluated visually with histograms. Continuous variables were defined by mean (standard deviation) or median (25th-75th percentile) depending on distribution characteristics. Categorical variables were defined by numbers and percentages. Continuous variables were compared between the groups with the t test or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate. Categorical variables were compared by the chi-square test and its derivatives as appropriate. A two-sided P<0.05 indicated statistical significance. Results: Both groups had similar antral follicle counts, median parity (0) and number of previous failed cycles (0). The median number of oocytes (8 vs. 7), metaphase-two oocytes (6 vs. 5.5), blastocysts (1 vs. 1), clinical pregnancy rates (CPR) (28% vs. 22%), ongoing pregnancy rates (OPR) (22% vs. 20%) and pregnancy rate per transfer (53.3% vs 53.8%) were similar between the dual trigger and hCG only groups, respectively. Conclusion: Dual trigger for oocyte maturation stimulation failed to improve the ICSI outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: What is the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on the outcome of a pregnancy after medically assisted reproduction (MAR)?, Summary Answer: Our results suggest that MAR pregnancies are not differentially affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to spontaneous pregnancies., What Is Known Already: Information on the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on pregnancy after MAR is scarce when women get infected during MAR or early pregnancy, even though such information is vital for informing women seeking pregnancy., Study Design, Size, Duration: Data from SARS-CoV-2 affected MAR pregnancies were collected between May 2020 and June 2021 through a voluntary data collection, organised by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE)., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: All ESHRE members were invited to participate to an online data collection for SARS-CoV-2-infected MAR pregnancies., Main Results and the Role of Chance: The dataset includes 80 cases from 32 countries, including 67 live births, 10 miscarriages, 2 stillbirths and 1 maternal death. An additional 25pregnancies were ongoing at the time of writing., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: An international data registry based on voluntary contribution can be subject to selective reporting with possible risks of over- or under-estimation., Wider Implications of the Findings: The current data can be used to guide clinical decisions in the care of women pregnant after MAR, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The authors acknowledge the support of ESHRE for the data registry and meetings. J.S.T. reports grants or contracts from Sigrid Juselius Foundation, EU and Helsinki University Hospital Funds, outside the scope of the current work. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., Trial Registration Number: N/A., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.)